New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a
nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a
"Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed
considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense
initiatives more successful? Can such an application of
science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable,
necessary or impossible?
Read Debates, a new
Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published
every Thursday.
(15669 previous messages)
wrcooper
- 10:53am Oct 26, 2003 EST (#
15670 of 15672)
In re: http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@13.6kLpbb9iSUK.4929423@.f28e622/17368
http://forums.nytimes.com/webin/WebX?8@@.f28e622/17369
You wrote:
...is perhaps a separate issue from purely
technical analysis which you unsuccessfully conflate with
the words "In other words.."
Yes, it is a separate issue. What I have been seeking to
understand, and you have yet to comment upon, is why you
believe that the NMD program is field ready and should be
deployed in 2004, as the Bush administration proposes. You
haven't provided any rebuttal of the basic objections I've
presented; you've only stated that you trust the government
and you don't like the political pedigree of the people who
have criticized the program.
I have presented a number of arguments that attack the
basic logic of the NMD program. You've neer rebutted any of
those arguments. For instance, I have stated that a
fundamental logical fault in the NMD program--which has been
touted as a defense against a limited strike by a rogue
nation, a terrorist group, or an accidental launch--is that
the more successful it is, the more incentive such an
adversary would have to use low-tech means of delivery, such
as a container ship or burro or motorboat or diplomatic pouch
or whatever. You haven't addressed that.
I understand that you believe that missile defense is a
good idea; it makes common sense to you. That's fine. But what
makes you think that this particular system is ready to
deploy and is technologically sound and can accomplish its
mission?
I would trust someone who didn't tell me
they were "concerned" about anything in particular...so no
"Unions of Concerned Scientists"....or "Legions of Pacifist
Hamsters".....one could only presume that somewhere in the
USA is a scientist or five (sometimes I trust what John Pike
says, sometimes I don't) who is impartial and knows lots
about MD. Then, I'd give him/her a listen and see what I
think....
You don't trust the UCS because the organization has the
word "concerned" in its name?
I am left to conclude that you don't have any
authoriotative sources to present to us. I conclude that,
because given an opportunity to list them, you didn't. My
point in asking was that, supposing you had listed the Missile
Defense Agency
(http://www.acq.osd.mil/bmdo/bmdolink/html/mission.html), you
could hardly claim that the government agency in control of
the project was unbiassed. Or supposing you selected the
American Foreign Policy Council (http://www.afpc.org/) that
publishes the Missile Defense Briefing Report, a publication
highly supportive of the NMD program and missile defense in
general; that group is a right-wing think tank and the
report's editor, Ilan Berman, publishes in the National
Review.
My point is that any individual or group has a particular
background and political leaning, a bias, if you will. In
science, however, the influence of such attachments is
counterbalanced by objective evidence and testable hypotheses
which can be publicly debated and vetted. The UCS has made a
series of specific charges against the NMD technology, which
the Missile Defense Command and its supports have not
adequately answered. You, in this forum, have not answered
them.
That's what I'm looking for from you. Do you have any
source that specifically rebuts the technological criticisms
of the NMB program--for instance the countermeasures
criticism--that the UCS and others , such as retired
military figures and leading US politicians have made?
(2 following messages)
New York Times on the Web Forums
Science
Missile Defense
|